TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (6) TMI 460
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by assessee on which tax was deductible, but the assessee either did not deduct tax at source at all or deducted at lower rate. This position has been tabulated on page 4 of the assessment order as under:- SHORT-DEDUCTION - Table 1:- Sl. No. Head of expenses Name Total Tax deducted Total payment Rate at which tax should have been deducted (%) Actual amt. on which tax deducted Amount on which tax not deducted (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) (iv/vix 100) (viii) (v-vii) 1 Professional Sanjay Sawant 450 62,000 5.61 8,021 53,979 2 Location Expenses Aram Studio 20810 750,000 22.44 92,736 657,264 3 Property hire Stage Star Multimedia ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....980 6 Preeta Artist fees 27,000 -- 27,000 Total 8,96,743 3. Resultantly disallowance was made u/s 40(a)(ia) for Rs. 71,30,633/- (Rs. 62,33,890 for short deduction and Rs. 8,96,743/- for non-deduction of tax at source). The Ld. CIT(A) entertained some additional evidence. On that basis, he deleted certain disallowances and confirmed the remaining. 4. First ground of the assessee's appeal is against the confirmation of disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) in respect of (a) Rs. 62,000/- paid to Shri Sanjay Sawant towards short-deduction (b) Rs. 1,75,000/- paid to S.J. Studio and Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. for short- deduction (c) Rs. 2,34,000/- paid to Two Star Enterprises for s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. S.K. Tekriwal vide its judgment dated 03.12.2012. A copy of the said judgment has been placed on record. In all these cases, it has been held that provision of section 40(a)(ia) do not apply in case of short fall in the deduction of tax at source. No contrary precedent has been brought to our notice by the Ld. Departmental Representative. Respectfully following the above referred cases, we hold that the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in sustaining disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) in respect of expenses on which short deduction of tax at source was made. Resultantly, ground no.1 of the assessee's appeal is allowed. 6. Ground No.2 of the assessee's appeal is against the confirmation of disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) for non deduction of tax at sour....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the fact that the assessee did not deduct any tax at source from these payments. Since these payments are in the nature of fees for professional and technical services requiring deduction of tax at source u/s 194J, the act of the assessee in making these payments without deduction of tax at source, clearly brought this case within the mischief of section 40(a)(ia). This ground is therefore, not allowed. 8. Ground Nos. 1 and 4 of the Revenue's appeal are against the deletion of addition on account of payment of location expenses of Rs. 6,57,26,420/- to Aaram Studio; Rs. 24,30,484/- to Stage Star Multimedia towards property hire charges and Rs. 6,85,286/- to Aaram Studio for studio hire charges. Admittedly, these amounts were paid by the ....